Tarakash Josh! : A website for Youth!

The UK Paddy-Bingo ad showing a man sitting with his exposed tit with a small baby in his arms has been banned by the British tube and the Dublin bus service as "it has the potential to disturb public decency".

I think that the company has got more than what it had invested in this ad. Blogs are writing about it, newspaper carry the ad on their front pages as news, it seems like an advertiser's dream. In a few days, as the ripples of the ad will spread, more and more persons all around the world will know about the ad.

On first reflections, the ad may seem offensive. For example, it does seem to say that women are gamblers, they prefer gambling to taking care of their children. However, if you just look around you, the ad seems laughable, it is not the reality. In families with small children, it is men who go out more. An evening out, with friends at the pub or at the stadium or evening gambling, is more a male thing. Women can go out if they get a baby sitter, but the whole society has such a strong message about "good moms" that most women would feel guilty about leaving their children, especially young babies alone at home, not just for gambling but even for work.

I agree with Oliviero Toscani, the ad designer for Benetton that advertising has a social role. Toscani by using shocking pictures, creates controversies, attracts attention towards the brand he is advertising but at the same time, makes us reflect about issues. In the same way, I feel that this British ad is good as it makes us reflect on issues.

For example, I was thinking if men could breast feed, would the world be safer? Would there be less wars and fights?

Or if we could turn the ad and had a woman with a dildo in her hands and the ad had asked, "where have all the men gone?", would we be offended?A soldier is standing before couple of Majors and Marshals. They are arguing with him. The proceeding last for few hours and then Higher rank officers come to some conclusion. This is a scene of Court Marshal, let's see What is it?

Court Marshal is an important part of Army's Justice forum. This is mainly a British methodology. In 1689 Britain's king Charles the first started this rule by making a law which was known by Mutiny Act. He wanted to make his army more responsible and discipline. Britisher implemented this rule in India too. After Independence India did some modification to this law and applied Army Act 1950 and 1954.

In Court Marshal methodology, Army has given rights to implement there own court institute. Officers who court marshal by the Army law cannot counter the verdict passed during the court marshal proceeding in civilian courts like High Court and Supreme Court.

Now, the question is what is real need to make separate court for the Army? Well, Army should have there separate court for numbers of reasons. First, discipline level of Army is totally different from general civil society. Take an example of a employee who serves in a IT company. One day he gets a higher offer from another company and he lefts his company to join new one. Now, the company he worked with cannot file case against him in court. But, in Army, if a soldier lefts army without completing a required procedure it considers as a big criminal offense. Similarly, if a soldier lefts his troop during a war or if he shouts to his higher officers, it also considers as a offense. So these cases cannot be filed in civil courts but they file in Army courts.

Second reason for establishing Special army court is, army needs to complete the case at the earliest to maintain displine among its crew. We all know that if a case filed in civil court it takes years to reach final verdict, which Army cannot afford.

Therefore, the methodology of court marshal is essential for the army.